On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>> Why? Users can simply do
>>
>> import numpy.io as npyio ?
>>
>
> It caused problems with 2to3 for one thing because it was getting imported
> as io in the package. It is just a bad idea to shadow python modules and
> best avoided.
Call
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > It's just asking for import problems and general confusion to shadow a
> > Python module, that's why we renamed io to npyio.
>
> Why? Users can simply do
>
> import numpy.io as npyio ?
>
>
It caused p
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt :
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>> It's just asking for import problems and general confusion to shadow a
>> Python module, that's why we renamed io to npyio.
>
> Why? Users can simply do
>
> import numpy.io as npyio ?
>
IIRC this was
On Monday, July 25, 2011, Gael Varoquaux
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 03:52:48PM -0500, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>>Can't use numpy.datetime, since that conflicts with Python's datetime
>>library, especially in pylab.
>
> I don't understand that: isn't the point of namespaces to avoid those
>
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> Can't use numpy.datetime, since that conflicts with Python's datetime
> library, especially in pylab.
We're allowed to name the modules under numpy whatever we like--people
know that doing "from numpy import *" can (and already does) cause
havo
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> It's just asking for import problems and general confusion to shadow a
> Python module, that's why we renamed io to npyio.
Why? Users can simply do
import numpy.io as npyio ?
Stéfan
___
NumPy
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Gael Varoquaux <
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 03:52:48PM -0500, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> >Can't use numpy.datetime, since that conflicts with Python's datetime
> >library, especially in pylab.
>
> I don't understand that: isn't
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 03:52:48PM -0500, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>Can't use numpy.datetime, since that conflicts with Python's datetime
>library, especially in pylab.
I don't understand that: isn't the point of namespaces to avoid those
naming conflicts. To me that's just like saying that numpy
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> >> Probably should have! Either way, it's something to consider: if we
> >> introduce those functions now, people will start to use them where
> >> they are (np.xyz), introducing another change in usage comes 2
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>> Probably should have! Either way, it's something to consider: if we
>> introduce those functions now, people will start to use them where
>> they are (np.xyz), introducing another change in usage comes 2.0 (or
>> 3.0 or whichever).
>
> Absolut
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt
> Hey all,
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> > These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
> > reviews are welcome here:
> > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
>
> I haven't been keeping up with the datetime d
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> > I'm trying to make things fit into the existing system as naturally as
> > possible. The discussion you're talking about ideally should have
> resulted
> > in some guideline documentation about namespaces, bu
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> I'm trying to make things fit into the existing system as naturally as
> possible. The discussion you're talking about ideally should have resulted
> in some guideline documentation about namespaces, but I don't recall seeing
> something like t
2011/7/25 Stéfan van der Walt
> Hey all,
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> > These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
> > reviews are welcome here:
> > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
>
> I haven't been keeping up with the datetime d
Hey all,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
> reviews are welcome here:
> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
I haven't been keeping up with the datetime developments, but I
noticed the introduction of
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Derek Homeier <
de...@astro.physik.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:
> On 17.06.2011, at 8:05PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Derek Homeier <
> de...@astro.physik.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:
> >> On 17.06.2011, at 2:02AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> >>
>
On 17.06.2011, at 8:05PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Derek Homeier
> wrote:
>> On 17.06.2011, at 2:02AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>>
>> >> ok, that was a lengthy hunt, but it's in printing the string in
>> >> make_iso_8601_date:
>> >>
>> >>tmplen = snprintf(substr, suble
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Derek Homeier <
de...@astro.physik.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:
> On 17.06.2011, at 2:02AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> >> ok, that was a lengthy hunt, but it's in printing the string in
> make_iso_8601_date:
> >>
> >>tmplen = snprintf(substr, sublen, "%04" NPY_INT64_FM
On 17.06.2011, at 2:02AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>> ok, that was a lengthy hunt, but it's in printing the string in
>> make_iso_8601_date:
>>
>>tmplen = snprintf(substr, sublen, "%04" NPY_INT64_FMT, dts->year);
>>fprintf(stderr, "printed %d[%d]: dts->year=%lld: %s\n", tmplen, sublen,
>> dts-
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Derek Homeier <
de...@astro.physik.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On 16.06.2011, at 5:40PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> >> >>> np.datetime64('2011-06-16 02:03:04Z', 'D')
> >> np.datetime64('-06-16','D')
> >>
> >> I've tried to track this down in datetime.c,
Hi Mark,
On 16.06.2011, at 5:40PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>> >>> np.datetime64('2011-06-16 02:03:04Z', 'D')
>> np.datetime64('-06-16','D')
>>
>> I've tried to track this down in datetime.c, but unsuccessfully so (i.e. I
>> could not connect it
>> to any of the dts->year assignments therein).
>>
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> I've received some good feedback from Chuck and Ralf on the code and
> documentation, respectively, and build testing with proposed fixes for
> issues from the previous merge from Derek. I believe the current set of
> changes are in good shape
I've received some good feedback from Chuck and Ralf on the code and
documentation, respectively, and build testing with proposed fixes for
issues from the previous merge from Derek. I believe the current set of
changes are in good shape to merge, so would like to proceed with that later
today.
Ch
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Derek Homeier <
de...@astro.physik.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:
> On 15.06.2011, at 1:34AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> > These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
> reviews are welcome here:
> >
> > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
> >
On 15.06.2011, at 1:34AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
> reviews are welcome here:
>
> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
>
> and for those that don't want to dig into review C code, the commit for the
> documentation is here
These functions are now fully implemented and documented. As always, code
reviews are welcome here:
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87
and for those that don't want to dig into review C code, the commit for the
documentation is here:
https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/commit/6b5a42a777b16812
26 matches
Mail list logo
